Are shear force methods adequately reported?

Benjamin W.B. Holman,Stephanie M. Fowler,David L. Hopkins
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.03.032
IF: 7.077
2016-09-01
Meat Science
Abstract:This study aimed to determine the detail to which shear force (SF) protocols and methods have been reported in the scientific literature between 2009 and 2015. Articles (n=734) published in peer-reviewed animal and food science journals and limited to only those testing the SF of unprocessed and non-fabricated mammal meats were evaluated. It was found that most of these SF articles originated in Europe (35.3%), investigated bovine species (49.0%), measured m. longissimus samples (55.2%), used tenderometers manufactured by Instron (31.2%), and equipped with Warner-Bratzler blades (68.8%). SF samples were also predominantly thawed prior to cooking (37.1%) and cooked sous vide, using a water bath (50.5%). Information pertaining to blade crosshead speed (47.5%), recorded SF resistance (56.7%), muscle fibre orientation when tested (49.2%), sub-section or core dimension (21.8%), end-point temperature (29.3%), and other factors contributing to SF variation were often omitted. This base failure diminishes repeatability and accurate SF interpretation, and must therefore be rectified.
food science & technology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?